Airmasters Freight Services Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that invocation of provisions of immediate suspension of Customs Broker License after more than four years of alleged act is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, order of continuation of immediate suspension is set aside.
Facts- It was alleged that the appellants CB did not exercise due diligence in discharging their obligation as required under sub-regulations 10(d), 10(e), 10(k) and 10(n) of CBLR, 2018. On such basis, and by treating it as an offence report, Commissioner had come to the conclusion that the appellants CB had prima facie failed to fulfill their responsibility as per provisions of CBLR, 2018 for ordering immediate suspension under Regulation 16(2) of CBLR, 2018 vide Order dated 17.04.2023. After giving a post decisional hearing on 24.04.2023, the licensing authority i.e., Commissioner of Customs had ordered for continued suspension of the CB license of the appellants vide order dated 04.05.2023.
Conclusion- The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in a similar case of P.P. Associates Vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai has held that continuation of immediate suspension order is not sustainable, when such action is being taken after a lapse of long period of time. In the present case, the immediate suspension action was taken after passing of more than four years, and hence the above ratio of the decision taken by the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the present case before us.
